Advertisement

Psychosomatic Relations in Hypnosis and Epilepsy

  • L. Goldie
Conference paper

Abstract

The term psychosomatic medicine used in the title of this conference is in a sense superfluous. In clinical practice one always should try to consider the patient as a whole, that is his psyche and his soma, and perhaps we can justify the use of the term psychosomatic if only because it draws our attention to the fact that this is always necessary, and in certain conditions it is of more importance than in others to bear this clearly in mind. Some conditions have been specially called psychosomatic disorders and this reminds us that in such instances mind/brain/body relationships are particularly obvious. For those interested in the evolution of ideas on, and investigations of mind/brain/body relationships and their vicissitudes one cannot do better than study the history of both epilepsy and hypnosis, starting with the descriptions of “Mesmeric convulsions” and linking this with the equally chequered over-lapping history of epilepsy. To investigators of hypnotic phenomena it seemed that hypnosis would provide a convenient means of controlling the psychological situation when physiological experiments were contemplated. The epileptic process seemed a very obvious physiological event and could be used to indicate in the predisposed subject the effects of psychological processes. This seemed to be especially true of the reflex epilepsies.

Keywords

Spike Activity Electrical Response Cortical Response Peripheral Stimulus Arousal Response 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amantea, G.: Boll. Soc. ital. Biol. Sper. 7, 1464 (1932).Google Scholar
  2. Baglioni, S., and M. Magnini: Arch. Fisiol. 6, 240 (1909).Google Scholar
  3. Bohr, N.: Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature. London 1934.Google Scholar
  4. Bohr, N.: Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. London 1958.Google Scholar
  5. Clementi, A.: Arch, fisiol. 27, 356 (1929).Google Scholar
  6. Clementi, A.: Arch. fisiol. 27, 388 (1929).Google Scholar
  7. Clementi, A.: Boll. Soc. ital. Biol. Sper. 10, 902 (1935).Google Scholar
  8. Goldie, L.: Hypnosis in the Casualty Department. B. M. J. 2, 1340 (1956).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldie, L.: A study of Psychological Factors in a Case of Sensory Reflex Epilepsy. Brain 82. Pt. IV, p. 505 (1959).Google Scholar
  10. Hagbarth, K. E., and A. Hojeberg: Nature, Lond. 179, 526 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hernandez-Peon, R., and M. Donoso: (Personal Communication) (1957).Google Scholar
  12. Jouvet, M., and J. Courjon: Electroencephal. clin. Neurophysiol. 10, 344 (1958).Google Scholar
  13. Kopeloff, N., L. M. Kopelhoff and B. L. Pacella (1947), In Hoch, P. H., and A. P. Knight: “Epilepsy” New York. p. 163, cited by Rusinov, V. S., and M. Y. Rabinovich (1958).Google Scholar
  14. Livanov, M. N., I. V. Stralchuk, and A. M. Melekhava: Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol. Suppl. No. 8 (1953).Google Scholar
  15. Moruzzi, G.: Arch. Fisiol. 41, 158 (1941).Google Scholar
  16. Nevsky, M. P.: Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol. Supp. No. 8 (1954), cited by Rusinov, V. S., and M. Y. Rabinovich (1958).Google Scholar
  17. Poggio, G. F., M. Ribstein, G. B. Udvarhelyi and A. E. Walker: Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol. 9, 164 (1957).Google Scholar
  18. Williams, D.: Electroencephalograph trans. Medical Society of London, Vol. 66 (1948).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1967

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Goldie
    • 1
  1. 1.LondonUK

Personalised recommendations